Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: Conference tournament talk
Page: 3 of 3
mail
person
bobcatsquared
3/13/2022 12:09 PM
CatsUp wrote:expand_more
I can see your point about the VT situation in their conference tournament but if they get in that probably means a deserving “mid” is left out.
You're probably correct.

But my thought this weekend is that a final pick from a P5 conference gets left out. Say, maybe Michigan?
mail
person
CatsUp
3/13/2022 12:50 PM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
I can see your point about the VT situation in their conference tournament but if they get in that probably means a deserving “mid” is left out.
You're probably correct.

But my thought this weekend is that a final pick from a P5 conference gets left out. Say, maybe Michigan?
I just hate to think that a major conference, and the often referenced “P5” by extension, is rewarded with another team (when a conference outlier wins their tourney) when an argument could be made that a conference would only deserve a certain number of teams (as in the common refrain that the MAC deserves just one). I don’t think they have a composite list, 1-64/68, where they say, “well, this team is now in and this team at the very bottom of the list is out.”

I’m sure they do have a basic list but I feel final selections are not that simple, or fair. I don’t have any confidence in them doing the right thing when it come to mid-majors. I’ve seen too many situations over the years when the criteria (term used loosely) changes to favor majors. If the conferences were designated a certain number in advance of their tournaments, that would lessen the idea of selection day hanky panky”. Just my opinion.
mail
shabamon
3/13/2022 1:51 PM
If I were in charge, I'd add a rule that if you don't finish .500 or better in your conference regular season, you're not eligible for an at-large berth. It's ludicrous to me that Xavier is still in the conversation.
mail
person
CatsUp
3/13/2022 2:05 PM
shabamon wrote:expand_more
If I were in charge, I'd add a rule that if you don't finish .500 or better in your conference regular season, you're not eligible for an at-large berth. It's ludicrous to me that Xavier is still in the conversation.
^ Like this too.
mail
GraffZ06
3/13/2022 3:11 PM
How does allotting a pre-defined number of bids per conference make any sense or seem "fairer" than how it's done now?

Perfect example is ACC this year vs years past. I recall a few years ago the ACC got 8 or 9 teams in with Syracuse, Louisville, Pitt etc. This year they looked poised to only get 3-4 (Duke UNC Notre Dame and maybe Wake or Miami). VaTech went from bubble to in so maybe they get 4 or 5. How do you determine how many they "deserve" though? Do they get 8 bc they've been so good in the past and now you're letting teams like Miami and Syracuse etc in just to hit a number, or should they only get 4 or 5 and make a tip 25 team sit out because gosh just too many from one conference.

What it really boils down to is, is a 18 to 20 win P5 better or worse than a 23-25 win mid? That's a tough question and IMO judging each case individually is absolutely the best option. As each decision gets made, as teams come onto the list of 68, one gets bumped off.

Just because you (and to be fair I do too) disagree with a couple final decisions each year, doesn't mean that's not precisely what the committee is doing.

The MAC hasn't DESERVED a second bid in decades. That isn't the committees fault. Part of it is the dregs of the MAC. Part of it is the parity and competition of the MAC at the top. Part of that is inability to schedule and win non con games for a resume.

But honestly one of the biggest culprits is the fault of nobody and that's simply NCAA D1 expansion. It's added low conferences and added auto qualifiers who have sucked up a couple extra at large bids that could have and did go to the MAC in 80s and 90s.
mail
GraffZ06
3/13/2022 3:25 PM
What in the Richmond? Wow.
mail
bornacatfan
3/13/2022 5:03 PM
CatsUp wrote:expand_more
If I were in charge, I'd add a rule that if you don't finish .500 or better in your conference regular season, you're not eligible for an at-large berth. It's ludicrous to me that Xavier is still in the conversation.
^ Like this too.
I like that as well. Obvious that the NET did not really force the large conference members out of their friendly confines. There is an inherent advantage to being the home team and making the noncon season so one-sided in favor of the Major conference schools it just does not give a decent MAC, OVC, MW, etc school the ability to compete on a level playing field having to play away anytime they want to schedule up

With a .500 cut offs that would leave
FL ST at 10 10 as the last ACC team in with 8 eligible and only 4 o\in the top 50 NET scores. One of those is 7th place 11-9 Va Tech with a 27 NET.

Marquette at 11 8 with 6 eligible in Big East

Michigan with at 11 9 with 8 in the BIG, Indiana is below the line but will make it I think

Big `12 only has 4 teams above 500 OK,OK ST and Iowa St at 50 40 and 49 in the NET are all below 500 in conference.

Mountain West has 5 over 500 and their NETs are 25 28 29 nd 50 Oddly enough UT St at a net of 60 but under 500 conf record is a better NET than a ton of P% teams https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/rankings/net / I am not sure what the MOuntain West offices told their teams how to schedule but their NET scores put them in a good position.

PAC 12 has 8 teams above 500 but their NET scores go over 70s after the top 3 only 3 are under 60

SEC has 9 teams above 500 but their top 8 are under 58 in the NET.

WCC has top 2 Gonzaga and St Marys at 1 and 19 in the NET

Somehow X and Indiana are still around 40ish in the NET even though Indiana seems to play 5 or 6 home games every years at HOME vs high 270 and above NET ranked teams each year. At least X did the land grant tour with Ia St, Va Tech and Ohio A & M to offset the MAC West and MEAC foes

It will be interesting to see if a team like San Fran at 21 in the NET bounced from the WCC tourney but squarely above BIG, Big 12 ACC and PAC 12 will get in.

IMHO I do not think the NET goes far enough in making P5s play true road games. Purdue in the Convo was something that Matt said he talked to his staff about after he really looked at a road game once he got into the season. He had memories of a loud, raucous Convo when he and his pops were following the mid 80s Ball State teams.

Selection committee has their work cut out for them this year but this whole thing still needs tweaking.
Last Edited: 3/13/2022 5:22:23 PM by bornacatfan
mail
GraffZ06
3/13/2022 5:49 PM
I'd be fine with a 500 conference record requirement for an at-large bid. I'd also be okay with NCAA mandating a certain % of non-con games either at neutral or away locations. 33% maybe? Maybe even 40%?

If you did that I think you'd still see the top teams playing in the big neutral site tournaments like Maui/PreNIT etc but for those last couple would you rather play a road game at a P5 school, a Mac school or a low major?

Even if it added only 1 or 2 extra quad 1 opportunities for mid majors and possibly on a neutral or home court - could lead to a couple extra mids having better cases for those last couple at-large spots. Have to play em and beat em to be in the conversation though.
Showing Messages: 51 - 58 of 58
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)